At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural and is also a mental disorder. Those who would like to participate must do so in a respectful, intelligent manner.

At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural and is also a mental disorder. Those who would like to participate must do so in a respectful, intelligent manner.

You're not off to a very good start...You've presented a total of zero evidence.

For this exercise we will refer to the DSM for definition of mental disorder:A mental disorder is a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual and that is associated with present distress or disability or with a significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom.For unnatural we refer to Merriam Webster: different from how things usually are in the physical world or in nature

different from what is normal in a way that is seen as wrong, disturbing, etc.

not realnot being in accordance with nature or consistent with a normal course of events

2a : not being in accordance with normal human feelings or behavior : perverseb : lacking ease and naturalness : contrived <her manner was forced and unnatural>c : inconsistent with what is reasonable or expected

The truth regarding the removal of homosexuality is a little known fact as it was erroneous and without any scientific data to support homosexuality as a normal variation of human sexual behavior. In 1973 after rigorous efforts by the gay community to normalize homosexuality, they began a campaign of threats, attacks and disruption tactics with APA members as their targets. Proceedings were sabotaged by the gay establishment and members and their families were threatened with violence. Marking the first time in the history of medicine, a diagnosis was eventually left up to popular vote by the membership. Therefore if no new scientific breakthrough was present, we must assume that homosexuality is indeed a mental disorder.

At 7/28/2014 12:36:53 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:For this exercise we will refer to the DSM for definition of mental disorder:A mental disorder is a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual and that is associated with present distress or disability or with a significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom.

Okay, now how does homosexuality fit that description at all?

For unnatural we refer to Merriam Webster: different from how things usually are in the physical world or in nature

different from what is normal in a way that is seen as wrong, disturbing, etc.

not realnot being in accordance with nature or consistent with a normal course of events

2a : not being in accordance with normal human feelings or behavior : perverseb : lacking ease and naturalness : contrived <her manner was forced and unnatural>c : inconsistent with what is reasonable or expected

Well, given humans have been exhibiting homosexuality for all of recorded history, the first definition is out. Humans also aren't the only animals that exhibit homosexuality.

The prevalence of human homosexuality casts doubt on the second, but the second doesn't necessarily paint something that is unnatural as bad. Murder is normal human behavior and jealousy is a normal human feeling, but genius and ingenuity, by their very nature, are not.

Homosexuals do not force themselves to be gay, so there goes the third.

At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural and is also a mental disorder. Those who would like to participate must do so in a respectful, intelligent manner.

Strange, homosexuality is found in over 400 animal species. And has already been said, has occurred throughout human history. I find it personally astonishing that people today, in 2014, still believe that homosexuality is a choice.

"I am not intolerant of religion, I am intolerant of intolerance"
"True freedom is not simply left or right. It is the ability to know when a law is needed, but more importantly, know when one is not"

At 7/28/2014 12:36:53 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:For this exercise we will refer to the DSM for definition of mental disorder:A mental disorder is a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual and that is associated with present distress or disability or with a significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom.

Okay, now how does homosexuality fit that description at all?Well they are at a much more elevated risk of other mental illnesses and AIDS.

For unnatural we refer to Merriam Webster: different from how things usually are in the physical world or in nature

different from what is normal in a way that is seen as wrong, disturbing, etc.

not realnot being in accordance with nature or consistent with a normal course of events

2a : not being in accordance with normal human feelings or behavior : perverseb : lacking ease and naturalness : contrived <her manner was forced and unnatural>c : inconsistent with what is reasonable or expected

Well, given humans have been exhibiting homosexuality for all of recorded history, the first definition is out. Humans also aren't the only animals that exhibit homosexuality.Just because a very small minority of humans have exhibited a behavior does not make the behavior natural,twas a nice try though.The prevalence of human homosexuality casts doubt on the second, but the second doesn't necessarily paint something that is unnatural as bad. Murder is normal human behavior and jealousy is a normal human feeling, but genius and ingenuity, by their very nature, are not.Murder is not normal human behavior it is aberrant and intolerable in most societies,not even sure how you came up with that. Homosexuality is far from prevalent, it comprises a very small minority.Homosexuals do not force themselves to be gay, so there goes the third.Proof of that claim would be nice, but there is none so I understand your lack of evidence.I would say the same thing for the fourth that I did for the second.

At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural and is also a mental disorder. Those who would like to participate must do so in a respectful, intelligent manner.

Strange, homosexuality is found in over 400 animal species. And has already been said, has occurred throughout human history. I find it personally astonishing that people today, in 2014, still believe that homosexuality is a choice.

This is simply incorrect as animals do not have the ability identify as exclusively homosexual or preference toward one sex or another. Dr. Simon Levay (an admitted homosexual) writes about his research into the animal homosexuality myth. "Although homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in animals, seems to be a rarity."

At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural and is also a mental disorder. Those who would like to participate must do so in a respectful, intelligent manner.

Strange, homosexuality is found in over 400 animal species. And has already been said, has occurred throughout human history. I find it personally astonishing that people today, in 2014, still believe that homosexuality is a choice.

This is simply incorrect as animals do not have the ability identify as exclusively homosexual or preference toward one sex or another. Dr. Simon Levay (an admitted homosexual) writes about his research into the animal homosexuality myth. "Although homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in animals, seems to be a rarity."

At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural and is also a mental disorder. Those who would like to participate must do so in a respectful, intelligent manner.

Strange, homosexuality is found in over 400 animal species. And has already been said, has occurred throughout human history. I find it personally astonishing that people today, in 2014, still believe that homosexuality is a choice.

This is simply incorrect as animals do not have the ability identify as exclusively homosexual or preference toward one sex or another. Dr. Simon Levay (an admitted homosexual) writes about his research into the animal homosexuality myth. "Although homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in animals, seems to be a rarity."

Source: Dr. Simon Levay

Animals don't go on dates or get married, either.

What is your point? If your contention is that homosexuals should not be able to call their partnerships marriage because it is animalistic behavior then we agree, congratulations!

This is a dumb topic. The very means we are using to discuss this topic, a series of posts on an Internet message board using electricity powered by coal and using keyboards made of plastic seems more unnatural than a man sticking his naturally created penis into another mans naturally created anus. The whole argument screams naturalistic fallacy--if homosexuality is unnatural, who cares? What relevance does that information have?

DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

At 7/28/2014 3:45:01 PM, thett3 wrote:This is a dumb topic. The very means we are using to discuss this topic, a series of posts on an Internet message board using electricity powered by coal and using keyboards made of plastic seems more unnatural than a man sticking his naturally created penis into another mans naturally created anus. The whole argument screams naturalistic fallacy--if homosexuality is unnatural, who cares? What relevance does that information have?

I'm totally sigging this.

~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics

It is literally astonishing to me that people accept the homosexual agenda so blindly without any regard for science or pathology. I am amazed that seemingly intelligent people can justify support for sexual deviance with the all too familiar assertion that they are normal they just happen to like the same sex. That is not normal and should not be accepted as such. Anyone who disagrees with homosexuality is labeled a hate-mongering, homophobe, bigot, when in fact many of us are scholars, professionals, and scientist. Most of us wish homosexuals no ill-will and are far from having some unfounded fear of homosexuals. The fact that so many heterosexuals support the homosexual agenda of acceptance, without ever having researched the subject is disgusting and based in ignorance and media ingestion. The red herring here is that homosexuality is a human rights issue when it is in fact an issue of logic and morality. I do not think that homosexuals should be treated with less respect or dignity than anyone else, that being said I also don't feel it is our duty to appease them by condoning their obviously deviant behavior. They do not wish to be treated equally, they already are, what they want is people to say it ok to do what you know in your heart to be wrong. They seek acceptance of their devious behavior, and they are using marriage as the platform. Evidence of this can be seen in MA, where after ten years of same sex marriage being legal; less than 5% have tied the knot. They have systematically devalued marriage for those of us who are legitimately married and enough is enough. People need to wake up and stop drinking the media cool-aid.

At 7/28/2014 3:45:01 PM, thett3 wrote:This is a dumb topic. The very means we are using to discuss this topic, a series of posts on an Internet message board using electricity powered by coal and using keyboards made of plastic seems more unnatural than a man sticking his naturally created penis into another mans naturally created anus. The whole argument screams naturalistic fallacy--if homosexuality is unnatural, who cares? What relevance does that information have?

I said you have to have an intelligent argument. Based on what I have read above this is the wrong thread for you. Maybe "which is the best Pokemon" is more your speed.

At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural and is also a mental disorder. Those who would like to participate must do so in a respectful, intelligent manner.

This shows that homosexual men and heterosexual women have symmetrical shaped brains and similarly shaped amygdala. It also shows that heterosexual men and homosexual women have asymmetrical brains and similarly shaped amygdala.

It doesn't matter whether it's natural or unnatural. What matters is whether it's beneficial or detrimental to human survival. You can certainly make the case that being homosexual is bad for the individual who is homosexual as it makes them much less likely to reproduce, but since many gay couples reproduce through artificial insemination it's not a strong argument, and bisexuals and heteroflexible people are arguably more adaptable without being less likely to reproduce. The main risk associated with homosexuality is a higher rate of certain STDs among gay men, but gay women have a lower rate of STDs, and those risks can be avoided by using condoms and getting tested, so homosexuality itself still can't be said to be that much worse for individual survival.

There's no real evidence that homosexual behavior hurts society overall, either. Studies have shown that homosexuals who choose to have kids make better parents in many ways than the average heterosexual couple. There are no externalities caused by gay sex other than the risk of STDs addressed above. So even if homosexuality was harmful to the survival of the individual, the fact that being gay doesn't directly harm anyone else means it's not in society's best interest for people to waste their time and resources trying to stamp it out.

At 7/28/2014 3:45:01 PM, thett3 wrote:This is a dumb topic. The very means we are using to discuss this topic, a series of posts on an Internet message board using electricity powered by coal and using keyboards made of plastic seems more unnatural than a man sticking his naturally created penis into another mans naturally created anus. The whole argument screams naturalistic fallacy--if homosexuality is unnatural, who cares? What relevance does that information have?

I said you have to have an intelligent argument.

Yeah, good policy. So tell me: how is this not a naturalistic fallacy? I mean, I maintain that this entire discussion is a lot less natural than playing with another mans body. Am I wrong?

Based on what I have read above this is the wrong thread for you. Maybe "which is the best Pokemon" is more your speed.

Maybe so. Pikachu is adorable, don't you agree?

DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural and is also a mental disorder. Those who would like to participate must do so in a respectful, intelligent manner.

Your lack of understanding and ignorance with regard to the function of epigenetics comes as no surprise as the rest of your argument is equally flawed and erroneous. Even if the epigenetic argument were valid, it would only account for a predisposition not a predetermination of orientation.

This explanation can also explain transgedered individuals and has already been used to explain intersex individuals.I believe you meant transgendered and this too only serves to illustrate your ignorance and incompetence in the study of epigenetic "markers".

Identical twins Jason and Jarron Collins - only one is homosexual. The other is heterosexual. Many such examples prove that homosexuality is not genetic.

This shows that homosexual men and heterosexual women have symmetrical shaped brains and similarly shaped amygdala. It also shows that heterosexual men and homosexual women have asymmetrical brains and similarly shaped amygdala.This again only serves to prove that you are really good at baffling with bull snot but not very good at finding accurate research. There is no difference in the brains of heterosexual and homosexual men although it is no surprise the gay extremist cling to this fallacy." The fact that no differences in either volume or cell number were observed between the SDN-POAs of homo- and heterosexual men indicates a selectivity of the SCN in this respect and contradicts the view that male homosexuals have a 'female' hypothalamus." In other words you are posting junk science and I used your own source to prove it.

Heterosexual men and homosexual women have, on average, longer ring fingers than index finders. Homosexual men and heterosexual women have, on average, similarly sized ring and index finders.This again is junk science and another example of how homosexuals will go to the most extreme measures to perpetuate the myth of a genetic link that no one can seem to find even after mapping the entire human genome. Source: Human Genome Project

Exclusively homosexual relationships are, in fact, found in other species:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...Homosexuality is not just an action but an orientation, as animals lack the cognitive ability to identify their orientation the animal homosexuality myth is a fallacy of massive proportion.About 8% of all rams practice exclusive homosexuality, not bisexuality. About 20% of rams are bisexual. About 17% are asexual. The rest are heterosexual.Show me one picture of Rams anally penetrating each other and I shall concede, until then save your crap science.

At 7/28/2014 5:29:12 PM, storytimewithjesus wrote:It doesn't matter whether it's natural or unnatural. What matters is whether it's beneficial or detrimental to human survival. You can certainly make the case that being homosexual is bad for the individual who is homosexual as it makes them much less likely to reproduce, but since many gay couples reproduce through artificial insemination it's not a strong argument, and bisexuals and heteroflexible people are arguably more adaptable without being less likely to reproduce. The main risk associated with homosexuality is a higher rate of certain STDs among gay men, but gay women have a lower rate of STDs, and those risks can be avoided by using condoms and getting tested, so homosexuality itself still can't be said to be that much worse for individual survival. :There's no real evidence that homosexual behavior hurts society overall, either. Studies have shown that homosexuals who choose to have kids make better parents in many ways than the average heterosexual couple. There are no externalities caused by gay sex other than the risk of STDs addressed above. So even if homosexuality was harmful to the survival of the individual, the fact that being gay doesn't directly harm anyone else means it's not in society's best interest for people to waste their time and resources trying to stamp it out.

As you have offered no sources and nearly everything you have said is completely false I will disregard and move on to folks who are at least trying to defend their erroneous arguments.

At 7/28/2014 5:29:12 PM, storytimewithjesus wrote:It doesn't matter whether it's natural or unnatural. What matters is whether it's beneficial or detrimental to human survival. You can certainly make the case that being homosexual is bad for the individual who is homosexual as it makes them much less likely to reproduce, but since many gay couples reproduce through artificial insemination it's not a strong argument, and bisexuals and heteroflexible people are arguably more adaptable without being less likely to reproduce. The main risk associated with homosexuality is a higher rate of certain STDs among gay men, but gay women have a lower rate of STDs, and those risks can be avoided by using condoms and getting tested, so homosexuality itself still can't be said to be that much worse for individual survival. :There's no real evidence that homosexual behavior hurts society overall, either. Studies have shown that homosexuals who choose to have kids make better parents in many ways than the average heterosexual couple. There are no externalities caused by gay sex other than the risk of STDs addressed above. So even if homosexuality was harmful to the survival of the individual, the fact that being gay doesn't directly harm anyone else means it's not in society's best interest for people to waste their time and resources trying to stamp it out.

As you have offered no sources and nearly everything you have said is completely false I will disregard and move on to folks who are at least trying to defend their erroneous arguments.

At 7/28/2014 3:45:01 PM, thett3 wrote:This is a dumb topic. The very means we are using to discuss this topic, a series of posts on an Internet message board using electricity powered by coal and using keyboards made of plastic seems more unnatural than a man sticking his naturally created penis into another mans naturally created anus. The whole argument screams naturalistic fallacy--if homosexuality is unnatural, who cares? What relevance does that information have?

I said you have to have an intelligent argument.

Yeah, good policy. So tell me: how is this not a naturalistic fallacy? I mean, I maintain that this entire discussion is a lot less natural than playing with another mans body. Am I wrong?

Yes, you are wrong. The anus does not self lubricate and its function is the evacuation of fecal matter. So yeah I would say it is much more unnatural than my keyboard which was formed from plastic, derived from oil, a naturally occurring substance. Is that all Picachu?

Based on what I have read above this is the wrong thread for you. Maybe "which is the best Pokemon" is more your speed.

At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural and is also a mental disorder. Those who would like to participate must do so in a respectful, intelligent manner.

Your lack of understanding and ignorance with regard to the function of epigenetics comes as no surprise as the rest of your argument is equally flawed and erroneous. Even if the epigenetic argument were valid, it would only account for a predisposition not a predetermination of orientation.

1) Nice job avoiding what was actually said by saying I lack understanding of epigenetics. I have actually taken a few courses on it in college, so I find your remark hilariously flawed.Also, maybe you should try reading the paper I gave since it explains how it can affect fetal development to change sexual orientation.

This explanation can also explain transgedered individuals and has already been used to explain intersex individuals.I believe you meant transgendered and this too only serves to illustrate your ignorance and incompetence in the study of epigenetic "markers".

Identical twins Jason and Jarron Collins - only one is homosexual. The other is heterosexual. Many such examples prove that homosexuality is not genetic.

Ya, your point? If homosexuality is genetic, you have a point. If it is due to epigenetics, your point is moot. Read the paper, then reply about it.

This shows that homosexual men and heterosexual women have symmetrical shaped brains and similarly shaped amygdala. It also shows that heterosexual men and homosexual women have asymmetrical brains and similarly shaped amygdala.

This again only serves to prove that you are really good at baffling with bull snot but not very good at finding accurate research. There is no difference in the brains of heterosexual and homosexual men although it is no surprise the gay extremist cling to this fallacy." The fact that no differences in either volume or cell number were observed between the SDN-POAs of homo- and heterosexual men indicates a selectivity of the SCN in this respect and contradicts the view that male homosexuals have a 'female' hypothalamus." In other words you are posting junk science and I used your own source to prove it.

Um, really? Maybe you should reread what I linked. How about you quote the article instead of just making up bull****?

"HeM and HoW showed a rightward cerebral asymmetry, whereas volumes of the cerebral hemispheres were symmetrical in HoM and HeW."Which I said

"Homosexual subjects also showed sex-atypical amygdala connections. In HoM, as in HeW, the connections were more widespread from the left amygdala; in HoW and HeM, on the other hand, from the right amygdala."Again, what I said.

"Furthermore, in HoM and HeW the connections were primarily displayed with the contralateral amygdala and the anterior cingulate, in HeM and HoW with the caudate, putamen, and the prefrontal cortex."I did not say that before, but it furthers my point.

"The present study shows sex-atypical cerebral asymmetry and functional connections in homosexual subjects. The results cannot be primarily ascribed to learned effects, and they suggest a linkage to neurobiological entities."So, ya, try and use my own links instead of bull***.

Also, you cannot just claim something is "junk science", you have to show it to be such. Also, if you are saying that an article on the National Academy of Science's own website is "junk science", then that shows that you have very basic understanding of the subject.

This again is junk science and another example of how homosexuals will go to the most extreme measures to perpetuate the myth of a genetic link that no one can seem to find even after mapping the entire human genome. Source: Human Genome Project

Again, how is it junk science? Can you provide ANY evidence of such? Also, using the Human Genome Project and the genes of people shows nothing as homosexuality is caused by EPI-GENETICS. You are showing that it is you that has a lack of understanding of science.

Homosexuality is not just an action but an orientation, as animals lack the cognitive ability to identify their orientation the animal homosexuality myth is a fallacy of massive proportion.

Yay! Another assertion without evidence! Without even addressing the PEER REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE!

You are simply rejecting science at every corner to keep this, aren't you? I at least provided evidence in the form of peer reviewed scientific journals/articles. You keep making assertions without evidence, and seem to not even try refuting the evidence I provide.

About 8% of all rams practice exclusive homosexuality, not bisexuality. About 20% of rams are bisexual. About 17% are asexual. The rest are heterosexual.

Show me one picture of Rams anally penetrating each other and I shall concede, until then save your crap science.

*facepalm*Really? You choose not to even try and refute the evidence I bring up? You don't even seem to be opening the articles I provide. You keep saying, "No! You are wrong!" without any evidence. If you are going to call peer reviewed scientific articles "crap science" then you have to DEMONSTRATE why.

Also, I am pretty sure that linking an image like that on this site is against the rules, I may be wrong on that.

But, anyways, you have simply refused to actually address any points I made. You have shown that you are closed minded about the subject, and will not change your mind, regardless of the evidence. How about you address the actual points made instead of ignoring them by saying "crap science" when I linked you articles on some of the BEST online sources for science.

At 7/28/2014 7:10:03 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:As you have offered no sources and nearly everything you have said is completely false I will disregard and move on to folks who are at least trying to defend their erroneous arguments.

You're the one arguing that it has wrongness, the burden of proof is on you. Explain to me how two people having homosexual sex harms anyone but the two of them.

Yes, homosexuality is a naturally occurring phenomenon. It has been observed in not only intelligent species such as humans, chimps, dolphins, and bonobos, but in many bird and mammal species. It is not a "mental disorder" as one may say, but instead an evolutionary advantage (not for the individual in particular but for the species). Homosexuality is, in fact, preprogrammed into the genetic code, and not a life choice. Also, homosexuality has been shown to occur much more frequently in younger sibling than older ones, thus adding to this theory. You see, homosexuals, in not having children, are able to do other tasks for the tribe. Homosexuals have more time on their hands, and can care for the other members of the tribe's children, giving the others the ability to go and harvest food or protect the tribe. This behavior has actually been observed in chimpanzees.Also, notice how many homosexuals go into cosmetics, fashion, and other bodily services. Homosexuals, especially in tribal situations, make their siblings more attractive to potential heterosexual mates, thus increasing the prosperity of the tribe itself.Allow me to extract a section of an article from the Huffington Post (here is the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com...)"Turns out, the moms and aunts of gay men have an advantage over the moms and aunts of straight men for several reasons: They are more fertile, displaying fewer gynecological disorders or complications during pregnancy; they are more extroverted, as well as funnier, happier and more relaxed; and they have fewer family problems and social anxieties. "In other words, compared to the others, [they are] perfect for a male," Camperio Ciani said. Attracting and choosing from the best males enables these women to produce more offspring, he noted."Point made, bro? Please do reply to this post.

At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural

Homosexual acts occur in a plethora of animal species, so I don't see how it is unnatural. Even then, just because something is 'natural' or 'unnatural' doesn't mean that it is justified/unjustified.

Murder, for instance, occurs within nature. Does that justify murder?

Whereas something like modern technology could be considered unnatural, does this mean modern technology is unjustified?

I honestly don't see your point in trying to prove that homosexuality is 'natural' or 'unnatural'.

and is also a mental disorder.

The term, 'mental disorder', implies that something is possible to treat, and should be treated/cured. Homosexuality, when 'treated', only further hurts the psyche of the person being treated. It can't be 'cured', nor should it attempted to be 'cured'.

Also, mental disorders are natural occurrences in the animal kingdom. Real mental illnesses like schizophrenia occur in rats and non-human primates. Meaning that you can't say that homosexuality is 'unnatural' then turn around and say that it is a mental disorder.

At 7/28/2014 7:57:24 PM, Chimera wrote:The term, 'mental disorder', implies that something is possible to treat, and should be treated/cured. Homosexuality, when 'treated', only further hurts the psyche of the person being treated. It can't be 'cured', nor should it attempted to be 'cured'.

I don't think "disorder" implies treatability so much as it implies that the behavior is harmful to both the individual and the species' chance of survival (or the gene's chance of survival if it's genetic). Since we live in a world where survival is pretty important, something that hurts its own survival chances wouldn't be part of the expected order and would therefore be a disorder. As many people have pointed out, homosexuality doesn't hurt the survival of the species or population because gay sex doesn't directly harm anyone. It doesn't hurt the survival of the gene because it allows parents to specialize in parenting while their homosexual siblings specialize in other tasks, increasing the diversity of the population and therefore improving their ability to adapt and survive. It also may play a role in population control. Since genes sometimes activate differently depending on environmental factors, homosexuality may be more common among populations where the risk of running out of resources or destroying your environment are greater threats to your survival than the risk of being overrun by competitors or predators.

Ancient Greece, for example, was gay as f-ck, and they lived in a mountainous region that could only produce a limited amount of food, but they compensated for having a relatively small population by being much more specialized, which allowed small elite Greek armies to beat far larger foreign armies. Sparta was one of the gayest cities in all of history, so gay that they actually had difficulty maintaining a stable population. And yet they were the fiercest fighters in the entire world during their era, and they protected their genetically similar relatives in the rest of Greece from outside forces for so long that they no longer had to worry about external threats and ended up competing amongst themselves. It also allowed cities like Athens, Corinth, and Delphi to specialize in things like philosophy, art, and science, which left Greece so far ahead of the rest of the world that Alexander was able to conquer the largest empire in history at the time. It's amazing what you can accomplish when some small portion of your population isn't too busy banging out more babies than they can afford to support to invest in much else. And don't even get me started on how gay Rome was.

At 7/27/2014 10:42:40 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:In this forum I intend to show that homosexuality is indeed unnatural and is also a mental disorder. Those who would like to participate must do so in a respectful, intelligent manner.

Your lack of understanding and ignorance with regard to the function of epigenetics comes as no surprise as the rest of your argument is equally flawed. Even if the epigenetic argument were valid, it would only account for a predisposition not a predetermination.

1) Nice job avoiding what was actually said by saying I lack understanding of epigenetics. I have actually taken a few courses on it in college, so I find your remark hilariously flawed.

Ha, They don't teach epigenetics in college, it is still in its infancy as a science.

This explanation can also explain transgedered individuals and has already been used to explain intersex individuals.

I believe you meant transgendered and this too only serves to illustrate your incompetence in the study of epigenetic "markers".

Identical twins Jason and Jarron Collins - only one is homosexual. The other is heterosexual. Many such examples prove that homosexuality is not genetic.

Ya, your point? If homosexuality is genetic, you have a point. If it is due to epigenetics, your point is moot. Read the paper, then reply about it.

My point is you are just too incompetent to debate, sorry pal but your not very bright.

This shows that homosexual men and heterosexual women have symmetrical shaped brains and similarly shaped amygdala. It also shows that heterosexual men and homosexual women have asymmetrical brains and similarly shaped amygdala.

This again only serves to prove that you are really good at baffling with bull snot but not very good at finding accurate research. There is no difference in the brains of heterosexual and homosexual men although it is no surprise the gay extremist cling to this fallacy." The fact that no differences in either volume or cell number were observed between the SDN-POAs of homo- and heterosexual men indicates a selectivity of the SCN in this respect and contradicts the view that male homosexuals have a 'female' hypothalamus." In other words you are posting junk science and I used your own source to prove it.

Um, really? Maybe you should reread what I linked. How about you quote the article instead of just making up bull****?

I did, cant you read? Look at the above paragraph smart guy

"HeM and HoW showed a rightward cerebral asymmetry, whereas volumes of the cerebral hemispheres were symmetrical in HoM and HeW."Which I said

"Homosexual subjects also showed sex-atypical amygdala connections. In HoM, as in HeW, the connections were more widespread from the left amygdala; in HoW and HeM, on the other hand, from the right amygdala."Again, what I said.

"Furthermore, in HoM and HeW the connections were primarily displayed with the contralateral amygdala and the anterior cingulate, in HeM and HoW with the caudate, putamen, and the prefrontal cortex."I did not say that before, but it furthers my point.

"The present study shows sex-atypical cerebral asymmetry and functional connections in homosexual subjects. The results cannot be primarily ascribed to learned effects, and they suggest a linkage to neurobiological entities."So, ya, try and use my own links instead of bull***.

Also, you cannot just claim something is "junk science", you have to show it to be such. Also, if you are saying that an article on the National Academy of Science's own website is "junk science", then that shows that you have very basic understanding of the subject.

This again is junk science and another example of how homosexuals will go to the most extreme measures to perpetuate the myth of a genetic link that no one can seem to find even after mapping the entire human genome. Source: Human Genome Project

Again, how is it junk science? Can you provide ANY evidence of such? Also, using the Human Genome Project and the genes of people shows nothing as homosexuality is caused by EPI-GENETICS. You are showing that it is you that has a lack of understanding of science.

Homosexuality is not just an action but an orientation, as animals lack the cognitive ability to identify their orientation the animal homosexuality myth is a fallacy of massive proportion.

Yay! Another assertion without evidence! Without even addressing the PEER REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE!

It is unnecessary to address anything other than a dictionary, Homosexuality is a sexual orientation in which an individual is attracted to the same sex,right?? Animals do not have the ability to identify their orientation and therefore cannot be gay.

You are simply rejecting science at every corner to keep this, aren't you? I at least provided evidence in the form of gay agenda (not peer reviewed)articles. You keep making assertions without evidence, and seem to not even try refuting the evidence I provide.

About 8% of all rams practice exclusive homosexuality, not bisexuality. About 20% of rams are bisexual. About 17% are asexual. The rest are heterosexual.

Show me one picture of Rams anally penetrating each other and I shall concede, until then save your crap science.

*facepalm*Really? You choose not to even try and refute the evidence I bring up? You don't even seem to be opening the articles I provide. You keep saying, "No! You are wrong!" without any evidence. If you are going to call peer reviewed scientific articles "crap science" then you have to DEMONSTRATE why.

Also, I am pretty sure that linking an image like that on this site is against the rules, I may be wrong on that.

But, anyways, you have simply refused to actually address any points I made. You have shown that you are closed minded about the subject, and will not change your mind, regardless of the evidence. How about you address the actual points made instead of ignoring them by saying "crap science" when I linked you articles on some of the BEST online sources for science.

I addressed anything worthy of addressing, Epigenetics do not make you gay and until you have a reasonable comprehension of how epigenetics work I refuse to waste any further time on you. Only one of your sources was peer reviewed, the rest were blog posts or articles, not science. The one peer reviewed source you did use, I quoted as directly contradicting your assertions, apparently you missed that so I will provide it once more for the reading impaired(thats you)."The fact that no differences in either volume or cell number were observed between the SDN-POAs of homo- and heterosexual men indicates a selectivity of the SCN in this respect and contradicts the view that male homosexuals have a 'female' hypothalamus." That means that the brains of homosexuals and heteros are not different.

At 7/28/2014 7:10:03 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:As you have offered no sources and nearly everything you have said is completely false I will disregard and move on to folks who are at least trying to defend their erroneous arguments.

You're the one arguing that it has wrongness, the burden of proof is on you. Explain to me how two people having homosexual sex harms anyone but the two of them.

As you are unable to even string a cohesive sentence together,I think I will just move on. By the way, by your own admission homosexual sex harms the participants; that just proves that my assertion of homosexuality being a mental disorder is correct, so thanks for that.